A custom cost-estimation tool plays a major role in the success of four current projects at defense contractor Raytheon, helping to achieve profitability and 98% higher levels of reliability. This achievement is remarkable considering the defense industry is experiencing across the board cost overruns, and these overruns have, in many cases, reduced or eliminated profitability on many defense projects.
To reverse this trend, Raytheon worked closely with Galorath Inc. to develop a custom estimating tool called RAYCOST that is based largely on Galorath’s SEER-DFM (design for manufacturability) package. Raytheon's engineers RAYCOST daily to evaluate the cost of a wide range of design alternatives and reduce the risk of cost increases in various subsystems.
"We now use RAYCOST every day to keep expenses down by considering cost in the earliest stages of the design," said Quentin Redman, Senior Department Manager for Raytheon. "Even after the project goes into production, we still use the tool nearly every day to evaluate cost-reduction opportunities. The first project that we used these methods on, the AIM-9X missile has become a showcase for the benefits of structured cost estimation. As a result we have used these same methods on three more recent major programs, including the Evolved SeaSparrow Missile, and we have experienced similar results."
| The AIM-9X Evolved Sidewinder. |
To win the role as prime contractor on most of these programs from the government, Raytheon had to provide a firm, fixed price for a total package that included development and production of a fixed number of missiles. On the AIM-9X program, for example, Raytheon guaranteed a 98% reliability factor over the life of the program.
The combination of the guarantee and the fixed price contract represented a significant risk and meant that Raytheon needed to execute these programs almost perfectly to achieve the company’s profitability goals. On previous programs, Raytheon engineers used spreadsheets to analyze material quotes from vendors, estimate internal labor and material costs as well as other cost factors on. But a number of weaknesses soon became obvious with this approach, such as the unwieldy size of the spreadsheets, the opportunity for errors, and the inability to factor in risks. Managers also realized that the complexity of the AIM-9X and ESSM programs would generate such large spreadsheets that there would be no way to validate their accuracy.
| The Evolved SeaSparrow missile being launched. |
| A screen shot of the RAYCOST software. |
In previous missile systems as well as nearly every other defense project, designers have taken the basic approach of designing to the requirements and then trying to reduce the cost to make budget. The problem with this method is that cost isn’t considered until the design is largely fixed, at a point when it’s too late to have a major impact. But Raytheon engineers used RAYCOST from the beginning of these programs to consider cost and risk as independent variables.
"Having a tool that could accurately evaluate the cost of various options at an early stage in the program made it possible to give our employees and suppliers cost objectives from the very start and incentivize them to meet them," Redman said. "Even the very high-level estimates that the software provided in the early stages were useful because they got engineers thinking from the start about what sort of budget should be assigned to each subsystem. This forced them to make necessary tradeoffs, including thinking about whether performance could be reduced while still meeting the goals of the program objectives in some areas. By the way, the earliest estimates turned out to have errors of between 25% and 30% when compared to actual costs, which is far, far better than we were able to obtain with our previous methods."
| A different look at the AIM-9X Evolved Sidewinder in launch. |
The ability to enter risk was an important aspect of the success of these programs. For each estimate, engineers entered three possible costs: least, likely, and highest. These figures were automatically rolled up at the subsystem and program level. This made it easy to identify areas of the program that had higher than normal risk. In some cases, the decision was made to go with costlier but less risky technology while in other cases additional engineering resources were deployed to reduce the risk factor. The model also included a learning curve that estimated the reduction in program cost over the life of the program and these estimates turned out to be accurate within a percent or two.
| The AIM-9X Evolved Sidewinder from a different perspective. |
Jerry Fireman is president of Structured Information, a technology consultancy in Lexington, Massachusetts. Send your comments about this article through e-mail by clicking here. Please reference "Cost Estimation, June 2006" in your message.
For More Information
Galorath, Inc.
El Segundo, CA

DE's editors contribute news and new product announcements to Digital Engineering. Press releases may be sent to them via [email protected].
Follow DE
Join over 90,000 engineering professionals who get fresh engineering news as soon as it is published.